Letters to the Editor Wednesday

Much has been said of late about lobbyist Grover Norquist’s tax pledge. I thought maybe folks would like to see it and the oath members of Congress take when they are sworn into office.

Note the phrase “I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,” and decide for yourself if members of Congress can abide by both.

Here’s the lobbyist’s pledge: “I, ____, pledge to the taxpayers of the state of _____, and to the American people that I will:

ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and

TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.”

Here’s the Oath of Office: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

The lobbyist’s pledge makes no provision for national emergencies, war, deficits or any major unexpected event. It is a blind alley and, in my opinion it is unethical. Every legislator who has signed that pledge should immediately disavow it.

JOHN MATTINGLY

Thunderbolt

Isrealis need agreement with Palestinians

Some members of our Savannah Zionist community, Dick Berkowitz, Walter Lowe and Dr. Stephen Herman, have from time to time written the Savannah Morning News in defense of a pro-Israeli policy.

I often agree with them: the Arabs and Palestinians show few signs of accepting Israel as a normal state in the Middle East; they practice inhumane terrorism; they practice a newly learned form of anti-Semitism (learned mostly from Europe, not entirely from their own history).

But the essence of these Zionist positions is that the Palestinians must be left the meager portions of Palestine after the Israelis construct settlements everywhere on the West Bank.

This cannot work.

The Zionists are not as fruitful in giving birth to children as the Palestinians and the Israelis who do give birth frequently are the ultra-orthodox who do not serve in the military.

Sooner or later the Israelis will be swamped by the population of Palestinians and will have to submit to them.

Unless they resort to extermination or expulsion of the Arabs, something they could have done in the late 1940s but no longer can do, their situation is in the long run hopeless.

Israel in its own interests must make a deal with the Palestinians. Dwelling legitimately on their unjust situation will not solve the problem.

I am waiting for Messrs. Berkowitz, Lowe and Herman to offer us something more than lamentations and historical data. I am waiting for them to face reality.

NORMAN RAVITCH

Savannah

Obama’s Sandy failure needs attention

I would like to know something. Where is the widespread condemnation of the lack of leadership on the part of the Obama regime during the Hurricane Sandy recovery and cleanup?

It has been weeks and there are still thousands without power and/or anywhere to lay their heads. There has been looting, but unlike Katrina’s bloodbaths, it is not being covered.

President Obama showed up for two photo ops and then vanished into thin air.

FEMA has been its usual self, creating more problems than it could possibly solve. And through it all, there has not been one inkling of criticism from the propaganda ministry that calls itself the media.

President Bush was roundly criticized for the incompetence of the local and state leaders during Katrina’s aftermath.

Where is that indignation for Obama’s gross lack of leadership on Sandy? You won’t see it because this nation’s media is fully invested in promoting the illusion that Barack Obama can do no wrong.

MARC WILKS

Savannah

Ryan’s election, big-government hypocrisy

In the Nov. 19, edition of the Savannah Morning News, two letters were published in response to mine of Nov.12, commenting on Paul Ryan’s reelection to the House of Representatives while a candidate for vice president.

Marie L. Dowd and Walter Lowe noted that Barack Obama and Lyndon Johnson respectively retained their Senate seats when running for president and the latter as vice president.

Those responders missed the point.

Lyndon Johnson, like Ryan, ran for reelection when seeking the vice presidency. However, Sen. Johnson was not anti-government. Sen. Obama, like his opponent Sen. John McCain, was in the middle of his term.

Both Mr. Lowe and Ms. Dowd missed the message of my letter. I never stated that Mr. Ryan should not have attempted to retain his seat as a representative in the event he was not elected vice president. The point was he should have “just let the public know.”

Also, it was of interest to me that an individual who opposes big government and contends the national budget should be reduced should seek to retain his full salary and benefits affected by the fiscal sequestration which he endorsed for the federal budget.

As for Mr. Lowe’s comment that my letter should be run in “the comic section,” if publication was permitted there, I would have submitted, “Isn’t seeking the second highest office in the land when you oppose government like naming a pacifist as secretary of defense?”

STANLEY HARRIS, JR.

Savannah

Good for the soul of every taxpayer

The letter (Dec. 4) of Lawrence S. Marley, MSW, avers that he is in favor of raising taxes on those earning over $250,000 and states, “Struggle and suffering is good for the soul.”

Then why not raise taxes on everyone, as we certainly do not want to discriminate against any individual on “matters of the soul.” What is good for the goose certainly cannot be bad for the gander.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Zimmerman's actions were out of control. He had no business confronting Martin. Zimmerman's is a wanna be and thought he was more than what he was is what got him where he is. All he needed to do is see when Martin went and let the Police handle it. Instead he thought he was all that and confronted Martin.

Personally, I feel Zimmerman deserves to be sentenced for his actions in killing Martin. It didn't need to happen.

I've read all the "reports" about Martin and who he was and all that. I still feel Zimmerman's actions were way out of his area as some "Neighborhood Watch" person in a gated community. Martin had as much right to be there as Zimmerman since Martin was staying with someone who lived there.

Zimmerman needs to be convicted for the death of Martin and needs to serve the time he gets for the conviction.

Perhaps you meant to say "no matter the situation" and not "citation" because a citation is not an appropriate term for this situation.

You are entitled to your opinion of this as I am. Why didn't martin call the Police? Perhaps there wasn't any time for him to do so. This all went down pretty fast. Zimmerman called the Police and was told to stay in his car, yet he didn't, he chose to get out of his car and confront Martin. That's where Zimmerman made his first fatal mistake. Some "Neighborhood Watch" person does not even on the lowest scale equal a Police Officer.

Zimmerman needs to serve his time in jail for the murder of Martin, the maximum in my opinion. Martin had a right to be there because he was staying with a resident in what has to be a "mixed" gated community. Not that the "mixed" part really has anything to do with it.

Zimmerman was the fool in all of this. He thought he was something more than he was and disregarded what the Police Dept. or 911 Call Center instructed him to do, which was stay in his car!

Think about it, how many people living or staying with someone that lives in a gated community would respond positively when some random person wants to question why they are there, especially keeping in mind that this was a teenager?

Or Zimmerman could have followed the instruction of the 911 dispatch and not follow Martin. But as usual when a white person kills a black person people always defend the white person. This is why I think no matter what evidence is presented in court Zimmerman will be found not guilty.

As I said before, "You are entitled to your opinion of this as I am". Ever stopped to think that perhaps Martin didn't know he was in that much danger that he needed to ask the girlfriend to hang up and call 911 or hang up and call 911 himself?

He had every right to be there and why would he have thought he was in danger of losing his life knowing he had a right to be there? How would he have known he was being confronted by some loose cannon, wanna be cop? I bet Zimmerman's picture was not posted at the gate as someone to be aware of and stay away from. then you have to consider the precious few last seconds that any attempt to call 911 were available to Martin. Looks like he was fighting for his life and giving the lame [filtered word] Zimmerman a bloody nose.

Next time you are in one of the life threatening situations and come out on the losing end, let me know so I can question why YOU didn't call 911.

I know you see from my previous posts I think Zimmerman was completely in the wrong and is guilty of murdering Martin and feel Zimmerman needs to be convicted and serve the maximum sentence under Florida law. I have felt this way from the beginning and have followed this case, reading what has been reported from both perspectives. Based on everything I have read, if Zimmerman is not convicted and doesn't get the maximum sentence, the Jury has failed the Justice system in Florida or it is flawed. Whatever the outcome of this case, it will set a precedence in Florida.

Yes, I am a white person, but I don't over focus on white, black or any other race. I try to look at everything unrelated to race and what is right or wrong, in my opinion. I try to respect everyone's right to their own opinion, but will admit sometimes I must interject and state my opinion.

I read your response. I understand what you are saying, but I will continue to disagree with you in the Zimmerman/Martin situation.

I get what you are saying, but I don't think your position is relevant in this situation. Martin wasn't attempting to commit a crime. He was on his way back to the place he was staying, gated community or not. He was not doing anything wrong, He was walking back to the place he was staying. Zimmerman took it to a confrontation and he killed Martin because of his stupidity and wanna be Cop mentality. He needs to do the time for his crime!

Would you really confront someone who you had no proof or true suspicion that they were in the wrong place and kill them?

I doubt that we will ever know exactly what happened that night between Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, unless a credible witness pops up from somewhere. So pontificating upon being sure about guilt or innocence is pretty foolish.

However, one thing seems to be indisputable: Zimmerman followed the kid around even after he'd notified the police. He was armed and in pursuit at least up until some point. If this genius had instead let the police do their jobs instead of playing cop, most likely the kid would be alive today. Zimmerman might not be legally liable for Trayvon Martin's death, but in the big picture it seems he should have trouble sleeping at night.

I beg to differ. I read daily arrests and prison populations quite often. I think a white-ish person shooting someone black is a very BIG deal. I don't have any statistics, but to be on the safe side, I would say whites use a gun at the most 20% of the time. This includes murder, drive bys, robberies, rape, shoot outs, lootings, car jackings, and the list goes on and on. So, I myself think it's a VERY big deal when a gun is used by someone white-ish, and to defend you, Mr. Thomas, I consider the point you are making, it happens quite seldomly.

You posted, "However, one thing seems to be indisputable: Zimmerman followed the kid around even after he'd notified the police. He was armed and in pursuit at least up until some point. If this genius had instead let the police do their jobs instead of playing cop, most likely the kid would be alive today".

You also posted, "Zimmerman might not be legally liable for Trayvon Martin's death, but in the big picture it seems he should have trouble sleeping at night".

The second quote is where I must disagree. Zimmerman chose to pursue Martin and confront him and when he was getting his butt whipped by Martin, he pulled his gun and killed him. This is what I have a big problem with. Zimmerman made the decision to follow Martin and confront him. He had time to think about what he was doing as he followed Martin, Zimmerman could have kept his butt in his car, yet he chose to get out and confront Martin. Had Zimmerman followed the instructions of the 911 operator and let the cops respond to his call, Martin would still be alive and Zimmerman wouldn't be where he is today.